-
Overview
Ehsanul is a specialist advocate who prosecutes and defends in serious and complex Crown Court cases. His practice encompasses serious violence, organised crime, drugs, firearms, sexual offences, fraud and financial crime.
Ehsanul is a Grade 3 CPS Advocate, a member of the CPS RASSO Panel and the Serious Fraud Office Panel of Counsel. He has experience appearing both as junior counsel and as junior alone in serious criminal proceedings, including before the appellate courts.
Alongside his broader crime practice, Ehsanul has developed a growing specialism in fraud and financial crime, acting in both prosecution and defence matters. He is currently instructed in an ongoing pension fraud investigation by the Serious Fraud Office and is regularly instructed by the CPS Specialised Economic Crime Unit.
He regularly undertakes pro bono work and has been included in the Pro Bono Recognition List since its inauguration.
-
Crime
Ehsanul regularly appears in the Crown Court and is instructed to do both defence and prosecution work in serious criminal cases. Ehsanul also has experience of appearing before the Court of Appeal.
Ehsanul is also instructed to advise local authorities and police during the investigation stage. He recently advised a local authority regarding the anonymity of young defendants in murder trials who were under the care of the local authority.
Some of the recent cases in which Ehsanul has appeared are noted below:
Recent appellate cases
R v JD (2026): Led Junior in an appeal against conviction on the issue of whether it was an abuse of process to add a more serious charge following the defendant entered guilty plea to a lesser charge. The case was reported and received coverage in legal journals including Archbold Review and Criminal Law Review.
R v CM (2026): Led Junior in an appeal heard by the Lady Chief Justice on the issue of whether it was an abuse of process for the investigating police force to receive funding from the insurance industry who were victim of the fraud. The Judgment was reported and now cited as an authority in the latest edition of Archbold (2026 ed.).
R v JR (2024): Successful appeal against a sexual harm prevention order made 5 years ago on the basis that the Judge did not have the power to impose such an order. The Court of Appeal quashed the order, and prosecution for breach of the order was discontinued.
R v WP (2024): Successful expedited appeal after defendant received a custodial sentence for a sexual assault offence. The appeal was allowed, and the defendant received a suspended sentence leading to immediate release.
Fraud Cases
Operation H (ongoing): Disclosure Junior in a case investigated and prosecuted by the Serious Fraud Office involving a £75 million fraud relating to pension schemes
R v PB (2025): Instructed to prosecute in a high-value fraud which spanned over 5 years. The case was complicated by the fact that the key witness passed away before trial and the other witness suffered from complicated health issues.
R v CM (2024): Instructed to defend in a 3-week trial for fraud and perverting the course of justice. The defendants were accused of being part of a fraudulent “cash for crash” claim over £100,000 in value.
R v DM (2023): Instructed by CPS Serious Economic, Organised Crime and International Directorate for a Fraud by Abuse of Position committed over 7 years. The defendant pleaded guilty. It was a high-profile case with attention from the national media. There was a confiscation order of £1.6 million. The case received coverage in various national media, including the BBC.
Serious Crime
R v KH (2026): Instructed to defendant a 16-year-old male accused of a joint enterprise stabbing along with three others. Ehsanul’s client was acquitted of the offence of causing wounding with intent.
Operation Bastille (2026): Instructed to defend a 16-year-old male with severe ADHD and low IQ who appeared first on the indictment alleging conspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm by driving a car into two young men as part of a revenge attack.
R v WS (2026): Successfully defended a young man with significant learning disability who was arrested for being concerned in supply of Class A drugs. The defendant was acquitted after advancing a defence of modern slavery.
R v S and others (2026): Led junior for prosecution in a case arising out of a feud between two Romanian families. The five defendants travelled from midlands to Bristol and launched an attack outside the Bristol Airport.
R v JO (2025): Successfully argued that the prosecution for Robbery in the Crown Court should be stayed on the basis that the prosecution arose out of same incidents which had already been prosecuted in the magistrates’ court.
R v TC (2024): Instructed to represent one of the three defendants accused of kidnapping and causing wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. Ehsanul was instructed to represent the first defendant in the Indictment. The prosecution offered no evidence following robust representation before trial.
R v AK (2024): Instructed to defendant in a case involving domestic violence and witness intimidation. The case was stopped at half-time after successful submission of no case to answer.
Sexual offences
R v SV (ongoing): Instructed to defend in historical allegations of sexual abuse where the defendant is accused of abusing his stepson. Both the complainant and the defendant suffer from significant learning disability.
R v ME (2026): Led Junior for defence in a case involving 6 complainants all alleging sexual offences against an ex-scout leader.
R v ER (2026): Instructed to prosecute in a multiple incident rape case involving repeated use of violence and strangulation during rape. The defendant was convicted and received an extended sentence
R v PS (2025): Instructed to prosecute a defendant who was the manager of a company and accused of sexually assaulting a 16-year-old employee during work
R v JS (2023): Successful half time submission in a case involving breach of sexual harm prevention order and breach of notification requirement following cross-examination of prosecution expert and investigating officer where the witnesses conceded that that data adduced upon by the prosecution to prove the case could not be relied upon
R v DS (2021): Led junior for defence in a case involving 3 complainants who made allegations of rape and repeated use of violence against the defendant. The complaints spanned over 10 years and the case involved a significant volume of material.
-
Regulatory
Ehsanul regularly appears at all levels in regulatory and licensing matters.
He has particular experience of representation in firearm appeals, having represented both appellants and respondents in such appeals hearings.
CC of Gloucestershire Police v CV (2026): Successfully resisted an appeal from an appellant who had been subject of three separate rape investigation but where none of them led to conviction.
CC of Gloucestershire Police v CM (2026): Successfully resisted an appeal from an appellant who had failed to declare changes in his mental health condition.
CC of Durham Police v ES (2025): Represented an appellant at a firearms appeal challenging decision of Durham Constabulary, Appellant was a gamekeeper for whom the license was essential to his employment.
CC of Sussex Police v GK (2024): Represented an appellant at a firearms appeal in Lewes CC where his firearms were revoked after a provably false complaint regarding domestic violence.
CC of Gloucestershire Police v CB (2024): Represented a 14-year-old boy in an appeal against refusal of firearms license. Appeal was conceded after successful representation regarding the boy’s potential to be a future GB athlete.
CC of Avon and Somerset v EM (2023): Successful representation of an appellant who had his license revoked after the firearms was accessed by a third party and then used to commit self-harm. License was returned following representation from Ehsanul.
Alongside firearms appeals, Ehsanul also has developed experience in other licensing and regulatory appeals. Examples include:
Environmental Agency v NB (2026): Represented a company accused of operating a waste facility without a permit. Following representation, the prosecution against the director was discontinued avoiding personal liability and a criminal record.
Environmental Agency v DTM GH Ltd (2026): Instructed to represent a company accused of operating waste facility without permit. Represented the company in multiple prosecution, including in a case involving three other defendants where offending was alleged to have taken over multiple sites.
North Somerset Council v NM (2026): Prosecution relating to sale of counterfeit tobacco and organised and repeated violation of tobacco regulations.
Bristol City Council v MR (2025): Prosecution regarding breach of CBO obtained following repeated disturbance caused in council property.
Bristol City Council v WE Shop (2024): Prosecution relating to sale of alcohol in breach of license and as part of a wider organised crime group that was facilitating shop lifting from local supermarkets.
-
Inquests and Inquiries
Ehsanul receives instructions on inquest matters. He has experience of attending inquests on behalf of bereaved families and on behalf of local authorities.
Recent inquests include
Re JDP: Represented a care home in the inquest following an elderly lady was found dead in the care home following a fall and remained on the floor for some time before coming to anyone’s attention
Re DL: Represented the family at the inquest following death of a man with significant additional needs who died during a tracheostomy at the hospital
Re JP: Represented a care home in an inquest into the death of a male who died following developing pressure sores.
Ehsanul’s articles on Inquest law can be seen below:
Inquest into the death of Jairus Earl – what next for holders of shotgun certificates?
